In the Shade of the

Trust Arbor: Nurturing

Better Business

THE GROWING TRUST INITIATIVE

A ‘Portrait Thinking’ Discussion Paper
 In the Shade of the Trust Arbor

Every day customers interact with hundreds of products and services, thousands
if you include communication messages as interactions. While the volume has
exploded, the time provided for each has reduced dramatically.

So how does consumer decision making handle the vast number of interactions
with little time for deliberation? What signals, proxies and approximations do
consumers use today in the stead of time-intensive decision making processes? Do
brand-customer relationships still matter in a world of ‘faceless’ interactions? And
therefore what role does trust play in those relationships?

Attempting to answer these questions is the basis for this series of Portrait Thinking
Discussion Papers. This initial paper explores the background to and current
customer relationship environment, why customer trust is even more relevant today
and how you can grow and nurture that trust.

Future papers in the series delve further into individual elements that build
customer trust and how they intertwine and interact. By referencing research and
extrapolating established theory we hope to open new avenues of thinking about
each customer interaction and what it might mean to your business.

Page 2
 In the Shade of the Trust Arbor

The Relationship Concept

To better understand where we are today, let’s take a short journey back to where the concept of relationships was
gaining its foothold in marketing.
In the 1990’s the discovery of ‘relationship marketing magic’ sprouted loyalty programs from every business. Then
came the CRM age where every business rushed to implement the latest and greatest and subsequently spent
years licking the wounds of budget blowouts, customer push back and corporate culture implosion. Finally customer
centricity has been hailed as a new way forward for business to delight customers and by doing so drive greater market
share. But it’s not quite so clear cut.
Customer centricity describes an organization orientating itself to focus on the needs and wants of the customer.
Mission and vision statements started to be peppered with the term and marketing and advertising exalted the benefits
this approach would deliver to customers. There are several high profile examples of customer centricity delivering real
benefits, such as Nationwide Building Society. However, there are equally other examples where customer centricity
has failed to make a difference except to place high levels of financial strain on the organization.
As organizations serve several stakeholders, a pure focus on the customer has been notoriously difficult to execute. It
requires most companies to rebuild from the ground up - culturally, organizationally and operationally. Not many have
been able to fulfil such an ambitious goal alongside the financial expectations of board members and shareholders.
It starts to sound like relationships and relationship building activities were doomed to under-deliver despite numerous
research outcomes and theories suggesting otherwise.

Trust as the key

The truth is relationships - person to person (interpersonal) or business to person (B2C) - do matter and do influence
customer behavior - just look at ‘social media’. If a relationship is defined as ‘an emotional or other connection
between people’ then it becomes obvious that both parties need to want the ‘connection’ and emotions are a key
driving force for building or casting aside that connection. Some customers don’t seek a long-term relationship with
your brand (although for several reasons explained later this may change) while others clamor for the certainty and
trust of a brand relationship. Studies1 have already shown that trust is key to lasting customer relationships, helps to
maintain market share2 and has a positive effect on the consumer’s intention for future purchase3.

Page 3
 In the Shade of the Trust Arbor
But herein lies the problem. Simply put, customers don’t trust marketers; they’re tired of being ‘sold’ irrelevant services
and they’re empowered enough to do something about it - witness the rise of #fail, do not call lists, online discussions
and massive opt-out from marketing messages4. Some companies are experiencing opt out rates up to a whopping 50
percent for existing customers - existing customers!
A Forrester survey demonstrates this lack of trust phenomenon with direct company communications via email or
direct mail well down the list of trusted information sources.

Page 4
 In the Shade of the Trust Arbor

So what is trust?
Researchers and academics have developed numerous definitions5 however for the purpose of our discussion:
‘trust is the belief by consumers that the organization (or service provider) will act in the
best interests of the consumer and not take advantage of customer vulnerabilities’.
It encompasses an expectation that promises will be fulfilled and enables customers to enter into exchanges where
there is a risk that the outcome might not be positive. If the outcome is certain, there is no risk and trust would not
play a part. However the multi-dimensional nature of risk, the increasing use of web-based distribution channels (e.g.
downloads, online shopping, cloud-based services like g-mail) and the morphing of corporate offerings as services
rather than goods6 means there are very few situations with no risk7.
This doesn’t necessarily mean that we all need to abandon the last fifty years of marketing strategy and look to social
media as the sole savior. Today’s marketing is different from the 60‘s mass-marketing and the 90’s personalized
marketing approaches. But the same key tenets learnt in marketing 101 are still relevant, whether you’re a social
media groupie or not.

Relationships built on trust - the essence of marketing

It’s time to go back to the essence of marketing - building relationships that deliver a win for customers and a
win for corporates; relationships built on trust - where customer trust has a value that is protected and enhanced
by marketers. Where customer trust abuses are avoided (like irrelevant messages or ignoring time or channel
preferences) and genuine individual relationships are nurtured and encouraged. This is more than one-to-one
marketing. It is more than segmenting the market via behavioral, demographic and psychographic factors and then
‘selling’ the service to the segment.
It is all about knowing enough about each individual customer to tailor products and services so closely to the
customer’s ideal that the customer is naturally drawn to purchase with little ‘persuasion’ required. It is all about
aligning all elements of the business to earn and grow trust - straight-talking is back in fashion.

Page 5
 In the Shade of the Trust Arbor

Growing trust - the Trust Arbor

A tree is a very good metaphor for trust. Both a tree and customer trust need to have strong roots and when nurtured
well they grow successfully. We call this the Trust Arbor, an analogy that likens trust to an ecosystem, it has to be
well balanced, in unison, not too much and not too little. It also highlights the fact that even the smallest change or
poor conditions can dramatically affect the health of the tree (could the customer disinterest phenomenon be trust’s
‘climate change’?). Just like customer relationships, it is an orchestration of many different aspects which, when
managed well, build a long-term, enduring and healthy condition.

Page 6
 In the Shade of the Trust Arbor
In this context, enhancing customer trust becomes a corporate goal. In its purest form, it can only be achieved if the
organization truly recognizes the importance of customers and aligns its strategy, processes and infrastructure around
the customer. This internal customer-centric strategy focuses on realizing the dream of a ‘single source of the truth’8.
But we have already witnessed the impossibility of pure customer-centricity - the ecosystem needs more balance.
Enter the concept of balanced centricity9, where customer focus and business pragmatism are adjusted to an
equilibrium. Balanced centricity recognizes that long term viability relies on delivering satisfactory outcomes for all
stakeholders - including customers, shareholders and staff. When implemented successfully, customers acknowledge
- in many cases sub-consciously - the whole interaction bundle includes peripheral benefits that add value to the
transaction.
But balanced centricity doesn’t have the PR appeal customer centricity has to customers - they’re not going to beat
a path to your door from a marketing tagline like ‘we put you in the centre of everything we do (except when that
might damage our quarterly results)’. That’s why your balanced centricity efforts should be invisible to customers -
below ground in our tree analogy. Outputs from this effort though, should be noticeable, like making ‘brand promises’
to individual customers and delivering on those promises - effectively boosting trust to boost loyalty and increase
customer value.
So how might this play out for the brand-customer relationship?

Page 7
 In the Shade of the Trust Arbor
The traditional view of relationship marketing and relationship management involves organizations seeking to move
prospects up a loyalty ladder from prospect to evangelist via seven stages as shown below:

Adapted from: Lovelock, Patterson & Walker, ‘Services Marketing’

Page 8
 In the Shade of the Trust Arbor
With a positive correlation between trust and loyalty / customer satisfaction, the more trust in a relationship the higher
the loyalty as perceived risk decreases - effectively moving the customer up the loyalty ladder.

Adapted from: Lovelock, Patterson & Walker, ‘Services Marketing’ and Hart & Johnson, ‘Growing the Trust relationship’

This journey is taken via multiple brand interactions which, over time, boosts customer satisfaction and involvement to
a hypothetical trust trigger point10 where in-depth trust develops.
Page 9
 In the Shade of the Trust Arbor
By overlaying the concept of differing types of trust as relationships develop, there are several significant trust points
during the move up the loyalty ladder.

Adapted from: Lovelock, Patterson & Walker, ‘Services Marketing’ and Hart & Johnson, ‘Growing the Trust relationship’

Initially a prospect has to overcome the trust barrier, your brand as the ‘unknown’ and where ‘generalized trust’
lives. Several strategies such as testimonials, positive reviews, ‘no-risk’ trials help to draw the prospect into an initial
interaction. This moves prospect to customer and a transactional level of trust is established - the interaction was as
expected and risks were minimized11. With further engagements and positive brand interactions, previous success at
a transactional level builds and develops trust across the other brand offerings - the customer could be considered
a client now. Eventually the client reaches the hypothetical trust trigger point where trust and loyalty increase rapidly
such that the client turns advocate and ultimately evangelist for the organization.
Page 10
 In the Shade of the Trust Arbor
Additionally, as the trust deepens past the trigger point, relationship commitment can withstand service failure - even
increasing customer satisfaction and trust from a positive service recovery experience (and positive doesn’t have to
mean a financial inducement)12.

Seeing each tree in the wood...

Obviously where an organization has hundreds of thousands or even millions of customers, it is impossible to
personally know each customer and where they are on their brand journey without an army of marketers. This is where
sophisticated technology enables the future of marketing – in a supporting role and imperceptible to the customer.
This technology can also provide customer intelligence and understanding that ensures the simple explanation of
marketing we all learnt upon entering the profession - marketing is the bringing together of buyers and sellers - is
simply executed though a strong understanding of the individual customer.

...to then nurture each one

Building trust, developing an emotional connection, with customers is one of the most important strategies you can
implement to boost customer value, improve relationships and ultimately impact your bottom line. Building trust
means a true customer focus on each interaction, understanding the context and background of the relationship and
putting the customer’s needs foremost - not to secure a short term revenue gain but to help them climb the loyalty
ladder where retention is easier and long term value is achieved.
To make trust happen, nurturing is needed. Without the internal mechanics to deliver customer knowledge and
understanding to every touchpoint, your trust efforts will flounder. Luckily technology advances have made customer
insight, understanding and delivery of this insight to every touchpoint possible. Now you’ve probably heard that before.
Today’s difference lies in necessity. Clumsy attempts at relationship building are no longer tolerated by customers
while unprecedented levels of computing power, bandwidth and network access have opened the door to technology
so sophisticated that it’s like a marketing expert directing every action automatically - and so clever it’s transparent to
the customer.
Forrester’s eight technologies ‘today’s marketer must have’ include customer data integration, predictive analytics,
web analytics, brand monitoring, contact optimization, event-triggered marketing, interaction management and site

Page 11
 In the Shade of the Trust Arbor
optimization13. For time-poor marketers across the globe struggling to devise, plan and execute, this kind of assistance
makes a real difference.
But technology alone is not the answer. Trust-building strategies to foster trust and nurture the relationship need to be
in place before the judicious addition of technology that supports those strategies (without taking over like a massive
weed).
The next discussion papers in this ‘Portrait Thinking’ series take different viewpoints on trust strategies and the
elements that you might consider, including references to research and established theory. Together they form building
blocks for further discussion and reflection - and perhaps new avenues of thinking about each customer interaction
and what it might mean to your business - stay in touch for the next in the series.

Page 12
 In the Shade of the Trust Arbor

Upcoming discussion papers include:

Nurture nature: how our B2B cousins can help our marketing
We will explore how business-to-business organizations have developed intricate brand nurturing strategies to improve
customer relationships albeit with a much smaller customer base than those in B2C. By examining these strategies
insight into possible B2C approaches for individual interactions en masse can be gleaned.

Where there’s a risk, there’s a sale: perceived risk and cultural factors
Strategies to reduce perceived risk inversely impacts trust and relationships as long as cultural influences are taken
into account. This paper examines risk and culture theory from Hofstede to recent times; the changing mix of risk
avoidance behaviors and developing strategies to minimize real and perceived risk.

Who’s holding the watering can?: losing control and thriving

This paper reviews what happens at each interaction and how allowing each customer to have some level of control
can deliver greater trust, particularly as customers seek to exert more control and ownership of the interaction.
For instance, inbound interactions (where customers contact you) can be the only chance you have to market to a
customer or prospect as opt-outs and do not call registers limit the reach of outbound programs.

It’s what is inside that counts

In a more theoretical discussion we’ll look at other strategies that address customer expectations and behavioral needs
that have also been shown to deliver trust benefits, including script theory and addressing key customer needs of
security, respect, esteem and fairness in interactions.

Page 13
 In the Shade of the Trust Arbor
End Notes

1 See Tara A. E. Ebert, ‘Facets of Trust in Relationships – A Literature Synthesis of Highly Ranked Trust Articles’, Journal of Business Market
Management, vol 3, 2009/1 for a review of research finding since 1966.
2 Urban GL, Sultan F, Qualls WJ. ‘Placing trust at the center of your Internet strategy’; Sloan Manage Rev 2000;42
3 Geyskens, I., J-B. E.M. Steenkamp, and N. Kumar (1998), ‘Generalizations About Trust in Marketing Channel Relationships Using Meta-
Analysis’; International Journal of Research in Marketing, 15 (July), 223-48
4 Media disintermediation has also shattered traditional communication models and channels as social media usage (eg. twitter, facebook,
blogging) has exploded - providing active consumers with a personal ‘story-telling’ opportunity to a wide ‘passive’ audience.
5 See Tara A. E. Ebert, ‘Facets of Trust in Relationships – A Literature Synthesis of Highly Ranked Trust Articles’; Journal of Business Market
Management, vol 3, 2009/1
6 Consider the increasing number of cloud-based or hosted services available today and some traditional goods providers reinvention in
a user-pays / access-fee business model. Even tangible goods selected and purchased online have an overwhelmingly high ‘service’
component to the ‘product’ as described by Kotler in 1972. Lovelock and Gummesson in ‘Whither Services Marketing? In Search of a New
Paradigm and Fresh Perspectives’ posit that there is no longer any difference between goods and services marketing.
7 Note also that we are not referring to ‘generalised trust’ as measured by polls and sentiment surveys. This is more intimate, experience-
based trust that is as unique as each individual.
8 Single source of the truth refers to a single repository of all customer information from anywhere in the company - crossing across product
lines, territories and internal departments.
9 Evert Gummesson, ‘Customer centricity: reality or a wild goose chase?’, European Business Review, (2008)
10 Hart, C.W., Johnson, M.D.; ‘Growing the trust relationship’; Marketing Management; 1999; pp.8-19
11 Garbarino, E. & Johnson, M.; ‘The different roles of satisfaction, trust and commitment is customer relationships’; Journal of Marketing, Apr
1999, 63, 2; Pg 70
12 DeWitt,T., Nguyen, D.,and Marshall, R.;‘Exploring Customer Loyalty Following Service Recovery: The Mediating Effects of Trust and
Emotions’; Journal of Service Research, 2008, 10; 269
13 Vittal, S. (with Condon, C., Anderson, E. and Joseph, J.); ‘Eight Marketing technologies that enable Customer Centricity’; Forrester
Research Inc; 5 June 2007

Page 14
 In the Shade of the Trust Arbor

Bibliography
Artz, D. and Gil, Y.; ‘A survey of trust in computer science and the Semantic Web’; Web Semantics: Science, Services
and Agents on the World Wide Web; Volume 5 Issue 2, June, 2007; p58-71
Barratt, S. and Davis, S; ‘Connected Commerce: The intersection of e-commerce and e-communication’; Journal of
Direct, Data and Digital Marketing Practice; Vol. 10 No. 3
DeWitt,T., Nguyen, D.,and Marshall, R.;‘Exploring Customer Loyalty Following Service Recovery: The Mediating Effects
of Trust and Emotions’; Journal of Service Research, 2008, 10; 269
Fellenz, M. and Brady, M.; ‘Managing customer-centric information: The challenges of information and communication
technology (ICT) deployment in service environments’; International Journal of Applied Logistics, 1, (3), 2010; p88 -
105
Finne, A. and Grönroos, C.; ‘Rethinking Marketing Communication: From Integrated Marketing Communication to
Relationship Communication’; Article submitted to the Journal of Marketing Communications, special issue on The
Integration of Integrated Marketing Communication. IMC in a changing landscape; March 2008
Forgasa, S., Molinerb, M., Sánchezb, J. and Palau, R.; ‘Antecedents of airline passenger loyalty: Low-cost versus
traditional airlines’; Journal of Air Transport Management; Volume 16, Issue 4, July 2010; Pages 229-233
Garbarino, E. & Johnson, M.; ‘The different roles of satisfaction, trust and commitment is customer relationships’;
Journal of Marketing, Apr 1999, 63, 2; Pg 70
Gelbrich, K.  and Roschk, H.; ‘Do complainants appreciate overcompensation? A meta-analysis on the effect of simple
compensation vs. overcompensation on post-complaint satisfaction’; Marketing Letters Journal; online 25 February
2010; http://www.springerlink.com/content/v71n604x60241043/
Geyskens, I., J-B. E.M. Steenkamp, and N. Kumar; ‘Generalizations About Trust in Marketing Channel Relationships
Using Meta-Analysis’; International Journal of Research in Marketing, 15 (July 1998); 223-48
Graf, R. and Perrien, J.; ‘The role of trust and satisfaction in a relationship: the case of high tech firms and banks’;
Paper presented at the 2005 Conference of the European Marketing Academy (EMAC), Munich; May 2005
Gummesson, E.; ‘Customer centricity: reality or a wild goose chase?’, European Business Review; 2008
Page 15
 In the Shade of the Trust Arbor
Hart, C.W., Johnson, M.D.; ‘Growing the trust relationship’; Marketing Management; 1999; pp.8-19
Huang, M.; ‘The influence of selling behaviors on customer relationships in financial services’; International Journal of
Service Industry Management; 2008 ; V19; 4: 458 - 473
Johnson, D. and Grayson, K; ‘Cognitive and affective trust in service relationships’; Journal of Business Research; 58
(2005) 500-507
Kantsperger, R. and Kunz, W.; ‘Consumer trust in service companies: a multiple mediating analysis’; Managing Service
Quality; 2010 ; 20; 1; 4 - 25
Keramati, A., Mehrabi, H. and Mojir, N.; ‘A process-oriented perspective on customer relationship management and
organizational performance: An empirical investigation’
Kim D., Ferrin D., Rao H.; ‘Trust and Satisfaction, Two Stepping Stones for Successful E-Commerce Relationships: A
Longitudinal Exploration’; Information Systems Research 20(2): 237-257, 2009
Latusek, D. and Gerbasi, A. (editors); ‘Internet Exchange and Forms of Trust in Trust and Technology in a Ubiquitous
Modern Environment: Theoretical and Methodological Perspectives’; IGI Global; April 2010
Luoa, X., Lib, H., JZhangc, J. and Shimd, J.; ‘Examining multi-dimensional trust and multi-faceted risk in initial
acceptance of emerging technologies: An empirical study of mobile banking services’; Decision Support Systems;
February 2010
Mitchell, A., IHenderson, I. and Searls, D.; ‘Reinventing direct marketing— with VRM inside’; Journal of Direct, Data
and Digital Marketing Practice; (2008) 10, 3– 15
Ndubisi, N.; ‘Relationship marketing and customer loyalty’; Marketing Intelligence & Planning; 2007; Vol 25, 1; Page:
98 - 106
Lovelock, Patterson & Walker; ‘Services Marketing: An Asian Pacific Perspective’; 2001; Prentice Hall
Sirdeshmukh, D., Singh, J. & Sabol, B.; ‘Consumer Trust, Value, and Loyalty in Relational Exchanges’; Journal of
Marketing, Vol. 66 (January 20Q2), 15-37
Tara A. E. Ebert; ‘Facets of Trust in Relationships – A Literature Synthesis of Highly Ranked Trust Articles’; Journal of
Business Market Management, vol 3, 2009/1

Page 16
 In the Shade of the Trust Arbor
Urban GL, Sultan F, Qualls WJ.; ‘Placing trust at the center of your Internet strategy’; Sloan Management Review;
2000;42
Vittal, S. (with Condon, C., Anderson, E. and Joseph, J.); ‘Eight Marketing technologies that enable Customer
Centricity’; Forrester Research Inc; 5 June 2007
Wahab,S., Noor, N., Ali, J.& Jusoff, K.; ‘Relationship between Customer Relation Management Performance and
E-Banking Adoption: A Look at Malaysian Banking Industry’; International Journal of Business and Management;
December 2009; Vol. 4; No. 12
Wallace M. S. Yee; Ruth M. W. Yeung; ‘An Empirical Examination of the Role of Trust in Consumer and Supplier
Relationship of Little Direct Contact: A Structural Equation Modeling Approach’; Journal of International Food &
Agribusiness Marketing; Volume 22, Issue 1 & 2 January 2010; 143 - 163
Ward, T. and Dagger, T.; ‘The complexity of relationship marketing for service customers’; Journal of Services
Marketing; 2007; Vol 21, 4; Page: 281 - 290
Yee, W. and Yeung, R.; ‘An Empirical Examination of the Role of Trust in Consumer and Supplier Relationship of Little
Direct Contact: A Structural Equation Modeling Approach’; Journal of International Food & Agribusiness Marketing; Vol
22, Issue 1&2; January 2010; pages 143 - 163
Zineldin, M. and Philipson, S.; ‘Kotler and Borden are not dead: myth of relationship marketing and truth of the 4Ps’;
Journal of Consumer Marketing; 2007; Vol 24, 4; Page: 229 - 241

Page 17
 THE GROWING TRUST INITIATIVE

The Growing Trust Initiative is funded by Portrait Software